


u^cg ^&/< a&%L%^ j^g/* 



<&*: 



uttrr 




I 



MR. UPHAM'S SPEECH 



EXTENSION OF SLAVERY : 



TOGETHER WITH THK 



ORDINANCE OF 1787, 




U 1849 




1 



. 






yj*._£>±. 



-<^M^? 



SPEECH 



OF 



CHARLES W. UPHAM, 

OF SALEM, 



IN THE 



fyoKst f Kcprescntaiiius 



OF 

MASSACHUSETTS, 

ON THE 

COMPROMISES OF THE CONSTITUTION 

WITH AN 

APPENDIX, CONTAINING 

THE 

ORDINANCE OF 1737. 



SALEM: 

Printed at the Tri- Weekly Gazette Office, 
1849. 









HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES— Feb. 20, 1849. 

In the House, at 12 o'clock, by special assignment, the re- 
solves concerning the Extension of Slavery were taken up, viz : 

1st — Senate resolves, four in number, concerning slavery and the slave trade. 

2d — Resolves, six in number, proposed by Mr. Upham, of Salem, concerning the 
extension of Slavery. 

3J — Resolves, six in number, reported by the House judiciary committee, concern- 
ing slavery and the slave trade, and submitted in place of the Senate resolves, with 
the same title. 

4th — Resolves, six in number, proposed by Mr. Hopkins, of Northampton, as a 
substitute for the committee's resolves. 

The question before the House was on ordering to a third 
reading the House Committee resolves (No. 3,) which were as 
follows : 

RESOLVES CONCERNING SLAVERY AND THE SLAVE TRADE. 

Resolved, That, in the present posture of the deliberations of Congress upon the 
subject of slavery in the territories of the Union, Massachusetts will fail to do her 
duty if she do not again utter her sentiments upon the subject of those deliberations. 

Resolved, That Congress has full power to legislate upon the subject of slavery in 
the territories of the Union ; that it has freely exercised such power from the adoption 
of the Constitution to the present time, and that it is its duty to exercise the power 
for the perpetual exclusion of the institution from those territories that are free, and 
for the extinction of the same in territories where it exists. 

Resolved, That, when Congress furnishes governments for the territories of Cali- 
fornia and New Mexico, it will be its duty to establish therein the fundamental prin- 
ciple of the ordinance of 1787 upon the subject of slavery, to the end that the institu- 
tion may be perpetually excluded therefrom beyond every chance and uncertainty. 

Reaoloed, That neither slavery nor the slave trade ought to exist in the District of 
Columbia, and that it is the duty of Congress to devise the most just, practicable, and 
expeditious mode for abolishing the same. 

Resolved, That the legislation pointed out in the foregoing Resolves does not vio- 
late, but pursues, the compromises between the North and South, that secured the 
adoption of the Constitution ; and that, as our forefathers intended to secure the non- 
extension ot slavery, while they were seeking to establish the Union, so we, their 
descendants, in seeking to secure the non-extension of slavery, are acting in the very 
spirit in which that Union was fonnded. 

Resolved, That his Excellency the Governor be requested to transmit copies of 
these Resolves to our Senators "and Representatives in Congress, to be by them laid^ 
before the two. houses of Congress, as an expression of the sentiments and wishes of 
the people of Massachusetts. 

Mr. Upham moved to amend the foregoing resolves by strik- 



ing out the fifth and substituting therefor the following, (No. 
2) proposed by him some days before, on which he spoke. 

RESOLVES CONCERNING THE EXTENSION OF SLAVERY. 

Resolved, That when the Constitution of the United States was framed and adopt- 
ed, it was well understood, by all who participated in that compact, that no efforts 
should ever be made, by the slave-holding States to extend their peculiar institution, 
but that its gradual and final removal was an object contemplated with faith and 
hope by the patriotism and philanthropy of the south as well as of the north. 

Resolved, That, on the strength of assurances given by the slave-holding States, to 
this effect, the free States entered into their obligations under the Constitution. 

Resolved, That the avowed determination of the slave-holding States to extend the 
area of slavery, is therefore, a violation of the compromises of the Constitution; and 
that the determination of the people of Massachusetts, to resist the extension of sla- 
very, is entirely consistent with the sentiments that prevailed, and the arrangements 
that were made in framing the compact upon which the American Union was found- 
ed. 

Resolved, That, as Massachusetts bore a conspicuous and responsible part in estab- 
lishing the Union of these States, upon the understanding above mentioned, it is her 
high and peculiar duty, while she is faithful to the engagements, into which the free 
States then entered, under her lead, to hold the slave States to the pledges they 
gave, in the ordinance of 1787, and in the debates and deliberations that resulted in 
the adoption of the Constitution, to relinquish all claim to extend the institution of 
slavery, beyond their own limits, into the common territorial possessions of the 
Union. 

Resolved, That, with these views we, the people of Massachusetts, assembled in 
this great and General Court, hereby pronounce the attempt, by the southern States, 
or any portion of them, or any parties therein, to establish the institution of slavery 
upon territory now free, and the common property of the United States, a violation 
of the compromises of the Constitution ; — and we also do request our representatives, 
and instruct our senators, in Congress, to use their utmost exertions, consistent with 
fidelity to the Constitution, to resist, under all circumstances and at all times, the ex- 
tension of slavery. 

Mr. Speaker — When, on the organization of the House, at 
the opening of the session, you, Sir, took the chair, to which 
it was our pleasure to call you, and which you have occupied 
to the high satisfaction of every member on this floor, among 
other suggestions which commended themselves to the good 
sense of those who heard you, and of the people, you express- 
ed a just disapprobation of the practice of State Legislatures 
overleaping their established boundaries, and meddling with 
matters that properly belong to the General Government. In 
some of our sister States it is too much the custom for the 
Legislatures to dictate in reference to pending measures of na- 
tional policy. We are not the constituents of members of the 
House of Representatives, in the Capitol, at Washington. The 



5 

people, who sent us here, have sent them there. They must 
do their business — we must do ours — and there must be no in- 
terference. We are not to rush madly into each other's 
spheres, but move on in our distinct and separate orbits. 

These remarks apply to all subjects but one. That of Sla- 
very is an exception to them. For reasons which I propose 
to give to the House, I deem it to be, in the present crisis of 
our Union, the duty of the free States, to speak and act, as 
Stales. This is pre-eminently, the duty of Massachusetts. 
We all know in what violence of complaint a portion of the 
people of the southern States have long been indulging, be- 
cause the people of the free States are opposing the extension 
of Slavery beyond its present limits, and with what impassion- 
ed declamation they charge us with violating what they call 
the compromises of the Constitution. It is my purpose to 
show that the southern States have no grounds whatever for 
their complaints ; and that the violations of the compromises 
of the constitution have all been on their side. I think, Sir, 
that the true strength of the cause of the free States, in this 
great controversy, has never yet been put forth, and that none 
of our politicians, nor even our abolition orators, have taken 
strong ground enough, or high ground enough. So far is it 
from being true that we have violated the compromises of the 
constitution in opposing the extension of slavery, and insisting 
upon what is termed the Wilmot proviso, (it deserves, Mr. 
Speaker, a better and more glorious name, being in truth the 
Jefferson proviso,) that, on the contrary, the very proposal to 
extend the institution is, itself, a breach of the contract, an in- 
fraction of the plighted faith, on which the Union was found- 
ed. 

So far as the compromises of the Constitution are expressed, 
in the literal text, and on the face, of that instrument, Mr. Cal- 
houn has enumerated them very fully and accurately, in the 
following paragraph, of his address, in the name of certain 
southern members of Congress, to his and their constituents, 
just published in Washington : 



' Not to go further back, the difference of opinion and feeling in reference to the re- 
lation between the two races, disclosed itself in the convention that framed the Consti- 
tution, and constituted one of the greatest difficulties in forming it. After many efforts 
it was overcome by a compromise, which provided, in the first place, that representa- 
tives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the States, according to their respec- 
tive numbers ; and that in ascertaining the number of each, rive slaves shall be estima- 
ted as three. In the next, that slaves escaping into States where slavery does not exist, 
shall not be discharged from servitude, but shall be delivered up on claim of the par- 
ty to whom their labor or service is due. In the third place, that Congress shall not 
prohibit the importation of slaves before the year 18U8; but a tax not exceeding tcrr 
dollars, may be imposed on each imported. And finally, that no capitation or di- 
rect tax shall he laid, but in proportion to federal numbers; and that no amendment 
of the Constitution, prior to 1808, shall affect this provision, nor that relating to the 
importation of slaves." 

The three-fifths ratio cannot, in a strict sense, perhaps, be 
reckoned among the compromises of the Constitution, as it had 
been established some years before. It was a compromise not 
of the Constitution, but of the Confederation. It was agreed 
upon, on the 1st of April, 1783, in the old Congress, as the ba- 
sis of taxation. The struggle, at the time of its original adop- 
tion, was, on the part of the free States, to have the whole num- 
ber of slaves counted in the apportionment of assessments up- 
on the southern members of the Confederacy, and on the part 
of the latter, not to have them counted at all. The result was 
that the free States prevailed so far as to have it agreed that 
slaves should be counted, in fixing the basis of taxation, by the 
three-fifths rule. 

In the convention that framed the Constitution of the Uni- 
ted States, between four and five years afterwards, when the 
basis of representation was to be determined, the contest in 
reference to how slaves ought to be counted was renewed, but 
it was reversed. The South tried to have the whole number 
counted, and the North tried to reduce the fraction as low as 
possible. But it was the dictate of obvious justice, that what 
had been agreed upon when the question was one of taxation, 
ought to be adhered to when the question became one of rep- 
resentation. The ratio of three-fifths was not, therefore, an 
arrangement made at the foundation of the Constitution, but it 
had already been established and acquiesced in, and was simply 
continued in operation. 

What is said of a capitation tax is merely another form, in 



fact, a repetition, under different terms, of the three-fifths ra- 
tio. So that all that remains of Mr. Calhoun's definition of 
the compromises of the Constitution, are the two following 
items. The provision in reference to fugitive slaves, and the 
grant, to Congress, of the power to prohibit the importation of 
slaves in and after 1808, and in the mean time, that is previ- 
ous to 1808, of imposing a tax, not exceeding ten dollars, upon 
each imported slave. Now a compromise necessarily involves 
the idea of mutual concession. We all understand, — it was 
then, and ever has been well understood, — how the consent 
by the free States to have fugitive slaves retaken within their 
limits, was a concession by them to the slave States. It will 
appear, in the sequel of my argument, how it was then sup- 
posed and understood, that giving power to Congress to levy 
a duty often dollars on an imported slave, or to forbid the im- 
portation altogether, was a corresponding and equivalent con- 
cession by the slave States to the free States. It was under- 
stood to provide the means for the reduction, removal, and fi- 
nal abolition of slavery. 

The compromises of the Constitution consisted of an inter- 
change of obligations. The free States said to the slave 
States, we will allow you to pursue, recover, and carry back 
your slaves, if as fugitives they are found in our borders. We 
will so far recognize and protect your property. The slave 
States said, on their part, we have already in the Ordinance of 
17S7, agreed to relinquish all claim to carry our slaves into the 
common territorial possessions of the Union, and we now agree 
to favor, if not provide for, the gradual and final removal of the 
slave institution from the land. If I can succeed in making 
out and establishing this proposition, it will be seen that it 
puts a new face upon the whole matter, and that it places the 
free States upon ground higher and stronger than they have 
yet occupied, upon which all of them, and all parties in them, 
can stand, and from which they can command the acquies- 
cence of the South, not as a matter of will or sentiment only 
— not by mere strength and power, but as a point of honor, 
and the fulfilment of an agreement. 



8 

Some five years ago (Acts of 1843, March 24,) a law was 
passed in this Commonwealth, forbidding judges, or justices of 
the peace, or sheriffs, jailers, constables or other officers of the 
State, to take any part, or render any facilities, in the capture 
or detention of fugitive slaves. Of this law, as a citizen, I 
then disapproved, and had I been here, I should have voted 
against it. I entertained, at that time, the prevalent views re- 
specting the compromises of the Constitution, and I thought 
the law of which I am speaking, a violation of them. But, 
sir, shortly after the passage of that law, I was led to study 
the subject in its historical sources, and were such a law now 
before us, I should vote for it. The moment the southern 
States entered upon the policy of endeavoring to extend the 
area of slavery, they violated the understanding upon the 
strength of which the free States originally agreed to the arti- 
cle respecting fugitive slaves, and they justified us in disem- 
barrassing ourselves, as far as possible, of our obligations touch- 
ing that point. 

I now proceed to present to the House the historical argu- 
ment upon which the Resolutions before it rest. 

On the 1st of March, 1784, Virginia, by an act of cession, 
(Henning's Statutes of Virginia, vol. xi. p. 566,) conveyed to 
the United States, to be their joint and common property, its 
territory northwest of the Ohio, an extent of country (Mass. 
Hist. Coll. 2d series, vol. i. p. 1S6, Letter from Richard Hen- 
ry Lee to Samuel Adams,) greater than what remained to her, 
that is, greater than Virginia and Kentucky, and in climate 
and soil, far preferable. She made this noble benefaction to 
her sister States, for the express purpose of cementing their 
union, and she called upon other States to follow her example, 
and throw their remote and unoccupied lands into the common 
stock. This was previous to the formation of the present Con- 
stitution, and the old Congress, as it was called, managed, at 
that time, the common interests of the Confederacy. Among 
those interests, none were felt to be more important than to 
lay wise and beneficent foundations of society and govern- 



merit for the great and populous Stales which, as was then 
foreseen, would rise over the broad and fertile regions of the 
North Western Territory. At that time, the best minds of the 
South, as I shall show, were as deeply impressed with the 
evils and the woes of slavery, as any of the philanthropists of 
our day, and it was felt by them to be of the highest impor- 
tance to prevent the blighting curse from desolating the open- 
ing regions beyond the Ohio. 

On the 1st of March, 1784, a committee of Congress, con- 
sisting of Thomas Jefferson of Virginia, and Messrs. Chase of 
Maryland, and Howell of Rhode Island, reported a plan for the 
temporary government of the Western Territory. The docu- 
ment was from the pen of Jefferson, and contained the follow- 
ing provision : — 

" After the year 1800, of the Christian era, there shall he neither slavery nor invol- 
untary servitude in any of the said States, otherwise than in punishment of crimes, 
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted to have been personally guilty." 

On the 19th of April, the above clause was struck out. The 
slave States took the ground then, as they do now, that they 
would not consent to be prohibited from going, with their pro- 
perty and peculiar institution, on equal terms, into territory 
that was the common property of the whole Union. 

On the 16th of March, 1785, Rufus King, a member from 
Massachusetts, moved the following : 

" There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the States 
described in the resolve of Congress of the 23d of April, 1784, otherwise than in the 
punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been personally guilty ; and that 
this regulation shall be an article of compact, and remain a fundamental principle of 
the Constitutions between the thirteen original States and each of the States described, 
in the said resolve of the 23d of April, 1784." 

On the motion to commit the foregoing proposition or arti- 
cle eight States voted in the affirmative : New Hampshire, 
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New 
Jersey, Pennsylvania and Maryland ; three in the negative : 
Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Neither Dela- 
ware nor Georgia was represented in the vote. The subject 
2 



10 

does not appear to have been acted on, under the form of Mr. 
King's motion. 

Various movements and efforts were made to establish fun- 
damental provisions for the government of the North Western 
Territory, but nothing could be definitively settled. This 
question of slavery was the insurmountable obstacle in the way 
of any satisfactory arrangement. In maturing an Ordinance, 
for the regulation of the Territories, it was found necessary to 
pass over the subject of slavery, and confine attention to other 
points. Committees were raised for this purpose, from time to 
time, and a gradual progress made. 

On the 9th of July, 1787, the Ordinance was again referred 
to a committee. Mr. Carrington, of Virginia, was chairman, 
and Messrs. Dane, of Massachusetts, R. H. Lee, of Virginia, 
Kean, of South Carolina, and Smith, of New York, were the 
other members. On the 11th of July, two days after the sub- 
ject was referred to them, this committee reported the Ordi- 
nance, which is and ever will be the fundamental law, the 
Magna Charta, of the North Western States. It is one of the 
noblest documents of the kind ever devised and constructed by 
man. But as reported, on the 11th of July, it did not contain 
a syllable on the subject of slavery. It had its second reading, 
the next day, on the 12th of July. 

On that day Mr. Dane, of Massachusetts, took upon himself, 
and upon Massachusetts, a solemn and most momentous re- 
sponsibility. He and many other enlightened and philanthro- 
pic men, in all parts of the country, at the South as well as at 
the North, felt the unspeakable importance of rescuing the 
North Western Territory from slavery. The members from 
the free States were immovably resolved never to consent to 
the extension of slavery ; but the slave-holding States, then as 
now, persisted in claiming a right to carry their slaves into it, 
to hold them there as slaves, and plant the institution of slave- 
ry among the primary elements of its settlement. Mr. Dane 
knew that the non-extension of slavery could not be secured 
without a price, and he determined to offer one. He rose and 



11 

stated that, in the committee, as ever before, since the day 
when Jefferson first introduced the proposal to prohibit slavery 
in the territories, it was found impossible to come to any ar- 
rangement ; that the committee desired to report only so far as 
they were unanimous : that they, therefore, had omitted alto- 
gether the subject of slavery, but that it was understood that 
any member of the committee might, consistently with his 
having concurred in the report, move in the House to amend 
it, in the particular of slavery. He therefore moved, as an 
amendment, the proposition of Thomas Jefferson, as it had 
been modified by Rums King ; and by way of compromise, as 
an inducement or consideration to the South, in virtue ot 
which they might be willing to relinquish their right to carry 
their slaves into the territories of the Union, he proposed to 
add a proviso, so that the whole section would read thus : 

< ; Article the Sixth — There shall he neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in 
the said territory, otherwise than in punishment of crimes whereof the party shall 
have been duly convicted: Provided always, that any person escaping into the 
same from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any one of the original 
States, such fugitive may he lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the person claiming 
his or her labor or service as aforesaid.'' 

The article, thus framed, interdicting slavery, but as the 
price paid for the boon, placing the North Western States un- 
der the odious obligation, afterwards fastened upon all the oth- 
er free States, passed unanimously, and instanter, every State 
and every member voting for it. 

This was the great compromise upon which all the proceed- 
ings, that resulted in the formation of the present constitution 
of the United States, were based. The slave States relinquish- 
ed their right to carry slavery into the territory that was the 
common property of the Union, and the free States consented 
to allow the restoration of fugitive slaves. This was the bar- 
gain then and there consummated. 

' I maintain, Mr. Speaker, that the slave States, at this day, can 
make no claim to plant Slavery in California or New Mexico, 
so strong as Virginia then made to cross the river Ohio with hei 

slaves. The territory then in question was separated from her 



12 

only by the breadth of that river. She not only had a common, 
joint and equal right in it with all the other States, but it was 
originally her own, and had just before been presented by her, 
as a free gift, to the Union. She might well have raised an out- 
cry against being driven away from an equal participation with 
the other States, in settling the region that was once all her 
own, and had just been given by her to the Union. She might 
well have claimed a right to cross over from one bank of her 
own river to the other. But she waived all such claims, and, 
in consideration of the protection guaranteed to her by Mr. 
Dane's proviso, she relinquished all claim to extend the insti- 
tution of slavery beyond the limits of the territory that remain- 
ed to her. 

It must be borne in mind that the territory which the South 
thus unanimously relinquished to freedom, was all that the Un- 
ion then possessed ; all that it ever, in those days, dreamed of 
possessing ; and all that it was consistent with the principles of 
the Union for it to possess ; and further, it was much more availa- 
ble, accessible, and desirable, as a resort for emigration, by the 
slave planters, than New Mexico or California. Still they gave 
it all up, and felt that they were compensated for what they 
had relinquished, by the proviso Mr. Dane offered. 

Now, Mr. Speaker, I ask the House, and 1 ask the country, 
to look at the real sense and import of this great transaction, 
consummated in the Ordinance of 1787. The question then 
was precisely the question that now divides this country — by 
far the most important that ever has been, or ever can be agita- 
ted in this or any country. It was felt to be so then. It is 
justly felt to be so now. 

Then, as now, a vast territorial domain had just become the 
common property of the Union. 

The slave States, then as now, claimed a right to go into 
that territory and establish their institution there, and claimed 
it on the same ground, then as now. 

The free States, then as now, felt bound in conscience and 
in humanity, to insist that the blight and curse of slavery should 



13 

never be permitted to extend over territory of which they were 
joint proprietors. 

In other words, the two sections of the Union were then ar- 
rayed agp'-ist each other, on the very same question, that now 
divides them. 

The free States demanded the non-extension of slavery, and 
an assurance to that effect ; and they faidy and fully purchased 
such an assurance, by paying the p 'ce, offered by Nathan 
Dane, and accepted by the South. And the result, then reach- 
ed, can only be interpreted, as a pledge by the slave States, 
that, if the protection to their property, guaranteed in the provi- 
so of the Ordinance of 1787, were secured, ibey would relin- 
quish forever all attempts to extend the area of sUivery. The 
slave States then agreed to do precisely what we now call up- 
on them to do. We ask no new concession — we only demand 
adherence to an old compact. 

The free States would not enter into any arrangement, ex- 
cept upon the basis of the non-extension of slavery: and the 
slave States would not agree to that, ui^ess for a consideration, 
which they received, and are receiving. 

It must be remembered that all we are bound to do, is to suf- 
fer fugitive slaves to be reclaimed. We are not required to act, 
or co-operate at all in the matter, but simply to permit it to be 
done. The South Carolina membets. at that time, tried to im- 
pose a more active obligation on the free States, but the propo- 
sal was indignantly rejected by the New England and the Mid- 
dle States. (Madison papers, vol. 3, p. 1447.) As it is, the 
obligation is felt to be an odious one. It is painful and humil- 
iating to feel that we cannot say of these free republican States 
what is the just boast of English Liberty — that whoever treads 
our soil, the chains fall from his limbs — and that whoever 
breathes our atmosphere, is evermore a freeman. It is indeed 
painful and humiliating to witness, without being able to pre- 
vent, a violation of the sacred form of Liberty, to stand with 
our arms folded, while slavery seizes and snatches back its vic- 
tim. But so vast, incalculable, and infinite was the blessing se- 



14 

cured, by the assurance of the non-extension of slavery, that it 
authorised much concession and sacrifice. The obligation, un- 
der which we were then brought, was suggested and assumed 
at the instance, and under the lead of Massachusetts. 

In the old Congress, they voted altogether by States — each 
State was required to have at least two, and not more than sev- 
en delegates — Massachusetts was represented by but two del- 
egates. They belonged to the immediate vicinity of my own 
constituency — Nathan Dane of Beverly, and Samuel Holten of 
Danvers. Mr. Dane moved the amendment which binds the 
free States to suffer the arrest of fugitive slaves, on soil in all 
other respects consecrated to liberty, and both of them voted 
for it. They trusted to the honor and truth of the South. 
Neither they nor the State they represented would have taken 
the responsibility of fastening such an obligation on the free 
States, had they not believed that by so doing they had stayed 
forever the diffusion of slavery. 

From the moment that the Southern States began to devel- 
ope the policy of extending slavery by the annexation of Tex- 
as, I have felt that it was a fraud upon Massachusetts, and up- 
on the memory of her representatives, and that a voice of in- 
dignant remonstrance ought to be heard, proceeding from the 
graves of Dane and of Holten. 

I proceed with my argument. The old Congress was in ses- 
sion, at Philadelphia, when the Ordinance was passed. At the 
same time, the convention for framing the constitution of the 
United States, George Washington in its chair, was also in ses- 
sion in that city. Some gentlemen were members of both 
bodies. There was, as was natural, much intercommunication 
between them. The same difficulty arising from the question 
of slavery, which, as I have shown, had for years paralyzed the 
proceedings of the Congress, was an insurmountable obstacle 
in the way of the convention. The members from the free 
States were more keenly alive to the importance of the ques- 
tion, than is imagined by those who have not studied their lan- 
guage and actions. They were unpleasantly committed, as I 



1.5 

have mentioned, by the three-fifths ratio. As they had insisted 
upon it for taxation, it was rather hard for them not to allow it 
for representation. But so great was their abhorence of slavery, 
that, had not the Ordinance of 1787 assured them that a limit 
was fixed for it. which it could never pass, they would not 
have agreed to insert the three-fifths ratio in the constitution. 
But. so soon as it was found that the Northwest was secured to 
freedom, and that the slave States had agreed to give up the 
right to extend slavery, the convention went on harmonionsly 
and rapidly to mature its work. 

It is curious to observe how precisely the relative posi- 
tions of Massachusetts and South Carolina, on the subject of 
slavery, were the same then as now. In the old Congress, 
when, on the 1st of April 17S3. it was agreed to count only 
three-fifths of the slaves, as a basis for taxation, Massachusetts 
could not be brought to sanction the arrangement. Her dele- 
gation was divided — Messrs. Osgood and Gorham voting aye, 
and Messrs. Holten and Higginson voting no. Rhode Island 
also voted no. and one of the four members of Virginia. Geor- 
gia was not present. All the other States and delegates voted 
aye. (Journals of Congress, vol. 8, p. 170.) In the conven- 
tion that framed the constitution, on the 11th of July, 1787. 
Mr. Butler, of South Carolina, moved that the blacks should all 
be counted, in fixing the basis of representation. There were 
three votes in the affirmative — Delaware. South Carolina and 
Georgia: and seven in the negative — Massachusetts. Connec- 
ticut, New Jersey. Pennsylvania. Maryland, Virginia and North 
Carolina. The next day, Mr. Pinckney, of South Carolina, re- 
newed the motion. Delaware changed her vote, making it % 
to 8. On the same day. the three-fifths ratio was finally adopt- 
ed — 6 in the affirmative. Connecticut, Pennsylvania. Maryland, 
Virginia. North Carolina and Georgia — 2 in the negative, New 
Jersey, and Delaware. Massachusetts and South Carolina were 
divided. Half the delegation in each persisted in adhering to 
the opposite extremes, on which, from that day to this, they 
have stood in direct and absolute antagonism to each other. 



16 

Georgia and part of South Carolina changed their votes, during 
that day, (July 12th, 1787,) owing, no doubt, to the adjust- 
ment of the slave question, then effected by Mr. Dane, in the 
simultaneous session of the old Congress. 

By the Ordinance, it was provided that fugitive slaves might 
be reclaimed within the States to be erected in the Northwest 
Territory. By the Constitution, however, the obligation of al- 
lowing them to be reclaimed was imposed upon all the States. 
This proves that the prohibition of slavery, beyond its then 
limits, was felt to be universal. 

The argument is this : The non-extension of slavery, into 
territory Northwest of the Ohio, had before been unalterably 
secured by the Ordinance of 1787. But the obligation which, 
by the Ordinance, attached only to a few States not then in 
existence, which in some future day might arise in that distant 
corner of the Union, and in consideration of which slavery had 
been excluded from them, was by the Constitution imposed up- 
on all the old free States. Why was this? For what consid- 
eration did they thus incur the obligation ? It could not have 
been for the sake of the exclusion of slavery over the North- 
west only, for that was already made sure by compact in the 
Ordinance of 1787. It was in consideration of a great prin- 
ciple established — and that principle was, that a line was 
drawn, never to be obliterated, beyond which slavery should 
not pass. Such a principle was appreciated by the free States 
as worth paying for ; and for this they were willing to incur 
the obligations which now bind us. But if the slave States 
are permitted to extend slavery any where else on the conti- 
nent, except in the Northwest Territory, nothing was gained 
by the old free States in coming under the obligations, before 
imposed by the Ordinance upon States to be erected in the 
Northwest Territory. What comfort, satisfaction or benefit 
could it have afforded Massachusetts, for instance, to have 
slavery interdicted from crossing the Ohio, but permitted to 
flow, without let or hindrance, in all other directions, over the 
length and breadth of North America ? There is no other ex- 



17 

planation of which these transactions are susceptible. The 
Ordinance of 17-87, viewed in connection with the Constitution, 
contains, as its substance, these two ideas — a limit forever put 
to slavery, on one side, and protection for it, in a certain shape, 
where it then existed, and so long as it should exist, on the 
other side. It means this, and it can mean nothing less. 

As the non-extension of slavery had been secured — as it was 
prohibited, by a fundamental and immovable compact, from 
ever occupying a single foot of ground in the territories belong- 
ing to the Union, which were all that, it was then supposed, 
ever could belong to the Union — as it was finally disposed of, 
consummated and placed beyond contingency, among the set- 
tled and irreversible things of the past, there was no occasion 
to speak of it in the Constitution. The acquisition of any 
more territory than that to which the Ordinance applied, was 
not among possibilities in the purview of the Constitution. 
That of Louisiana, in the opinion of Mr. Jefferson himself, was 
unconstitutional, and, of course, all subsequent acquisitions are 
equally so. But the other part of the bargain, that which binds 
us, namely, allowing the reclamation of fugitive slaves, was 
very properly, from the nature of the case, inserted into the 
Constitution. It was an obligation, not consummated, and of 
which the execution was to run on, in all probability, into a 
remote and indefinite future. 

But I proceed to other proof; and the only difficulty I have 
is, to reduce my materials within my limits. Commenting, in 
the introduction of my argument, upon Mr. Calhoun's defini- 
tion of the compromises of the Constitution, in his recent ad- 
dress to the Southern people, I stated that, reduced to their 
proper elements, they embraced these two items only — the 
provision in reference to fugitive slaves, and the grant to Con- 
gress of the power to prohibit the importation of slaves after 
1808, and in the mean time to levy a tax of ten dollars a head 
upon them. Now as matters have turned out this is a queer kind 
of compromise. Instead of a mutual concession, it has proved 
a couple of concessions, both on one side. But it was meant 
3 



18 

right at the time. All parties then felt that the power to pro- 
hibit or restrain the foreign slave trade was a sacrifice made by 
the South and a point gained by the North. And it is a fact 
well worthy of reflection — the thoughtful student, and the con- 
siderate philanthropist, may well ponder upon it, and draw from 
it a lesson of humility, caution, and self-distrust — that, what 
was believed to be a great security and attainment for freedom, 
has turned out to have operated precisely to the opposite effect. 
The interdiction of the foreign slave trade has, from the begin- 
ning, been not merely a protective, but a prohibitory, tariff in 
favor of Southern slavery. It has secured the entire home 
market to the domestic slave-breeder. It has quadrupled the 
value of slave property, and has kept alive the institution in 
half the slave States of the Union. 

But, at the time, it was supposed that it would, by cutting 
off the foreign supply, dry up and exhaust slavery at its foun- 
tain, and that its final effect would be the abolition of that spe- 
cies of property throughout the Union. 

In my first resolution, it is stated that it was " well under- 
stood that the gradual and final removal of slavery, was an ob- 
ject contemplated with faith and hope by the patriotism and 
philanthropy of the South as well as of the North." Of this 
proposition, the proof is most abundant. Whoever reads the 
documentary and political history of that period, will find evi- 
dence scattered all along its pages, not only that the people of 
the free States were as deeply interested as they now are — I be- 
lieve I may say, more universally interested — in the abolition of 
slavery, but. that the Southern people also entertained the same 
feeling to a great extent. Slavery was every where felt to be 
a bitter reproach and a burning disgrace to the land. It was 
thought to be a great point gained to this end, to clothe Con- 
gress with the power to prohibit the foreign slave trade. The 
article conveying the power was resisted by the pro-slavery in- 
terest in the South, on this ground, and relied upon to recon- 
cile the North to the adoption of the Constitution. It was ev- 
ery where regarded as providing the means, and placing in the 



19 

hands of Congress the power, to secure the final removal of sla- 
very. As illustrations and proofs of this fact, I will first refer 
to the debates in two of the State Conventions, assembled to 
act and decide upon the acceptance of the Constitution of the 
United States. I will cite from one State South and one 
North, of Mason and Dixon's line. In the North Carolina 
convention, the Constitution was opposed because the clause 
under consideration was regarded as aiming at the extinguish- 
ment of slavery ; and how was the objection met by the friends 
of the Constitution ? Why, it was met by a frank and honora- 
ble admission that it would, perhaps, and probably, thus oper- 
ate. Mr. Iredell — a name ever honored in that State — ex- 
pressed himself in the following noble language : 

" When the entire abolition of slavery takes place, it will be an event which must 
he pleasing to every generous mind, and every friend of human nature." — Elliott's 
Debates, vol. 3, pp. 97, 182, 277. 

In the Pennsylvania convention, Mr. Wilson, a gentleman 
who had taken a leading and honorable part in the convention 
that framed the Constitution, said : 

" I consider this"' (that is, the clause giving Congress the power to abolish the slave 
importation) "as laying the foundation lor banishing slavery out of this land. The 
new States that are" to be formed will he under the control of Congress in this par- 
ticular, and slaves will never be introduced among them.'' — Elliott, vol. 3, p. 250. 

In the first Congress, on the 13th of May, 1789, Mr. Parker, 
a member from Virginia, moved, under authority of the clause 
of the Constitution I am now considering, to impose a duty of 
ten dollars a head on imported slaves. He spoke of the im- 
portation as ''contrary to the revolution principles," and of sla- 
very itself he used the following language : 

" He hoped Congress would do all in their power to restore to human nature its 
inherent -privileges, and, if possible, wipe off the stigma which America labored un- 
der. The inconsistency in our principles, with which we arc justly charged, should 
be done away; that we may show by our actions the pure beneticeuceof the doctrine 
Ave held out to the world in our Declaration of Independence." 

The name of the author of these sentiments, Josiah Parker, 
of Virginia, ought to be held in everlasting remembrance. 



20 

They were, we have a right to presume, the sentiments of his 
constituents, for he was afterwards five times re-elected by 
them to Congress. 

Col. Bland, of Virginia, a man spoken of by Washington, in 
a letter to Dr. Belknap, (Sparks's Washington, vol. 11, p. 240) 
in terms of marked respect, uses language, which proves that 
he was worthy of commendation, and which fully justifies all 
that my Resolutions affirm : 

" He wished slaves had never heen introduced into America; hut if it was impos- 
sihle, at this time, to cure the evil, he was very willing to join in any measures that 
would prevent its extending farther." 

Mr. Madison also advocated the motion with great earnest- 
ness, and with that philosophical wisdom and reach of mind in 
which (ew, if any, have equalled him. He spoke of " the im- 
becility ever attendant on a country filled with slaves." Again, 
he says of States in which slavery exists, " every addition 
they receive to their number of slaves, tends to weaken them 
and render them less capable of self-defence." On this ground, 
he argues that slavery is a national concern, and that its in- 
crease ought to be guarded against " by those charged with 
the general administration of the government." Elliott, vol. 
1, p. 305—311. 

In another debate in the same Congress, in March, 1790, on 
committing a memorial from the Quakers, or Friends, as we 
now rejoice to call them, Mr. Madison advocated the same 
views. 

'' He entered into a critical review of the circumstances respecting the adoption 
of the Constitution, the ideas upon the limitation of the power of Congress to inter- 
fere in the regulation of commerce in slaves, and showing that they were not preclu- 
ded from interposing in their importation, and generally to regulate the mode in 
which every species ofhusiness shall he transacted. He adverted to the Western 
Country, and the cession of Georgia, in which Congress have certainly the power to 
regulate slavery ; which shows that gentlemen are mistaken in supposing that Con- 
gress cannot constitutionally interfere in the business, in any degree whatever." — El- 
liott, vol. 4, p. 213. 

These two last citations, in themselves, alone, fully sustain 
all that the Resolutions, before the House, assert or imply. If 
any man ever understood the Constitution of the United States, 



21 

it was James Madison. That he contemplated the abolition of 
slavery in this country, with satisfaction and hope, is evident, 
from the fact, that he argued in favor of the exercise of a pow- 
er to that effect, affirmed by him to be granted to Congress by 
the Constitution. 

That the view I have given of the design of the article in 
the Constitution, in reference to the prohibition of the foreign 
slave trade, is correct, can be proved beyond all controversy. 
Since the House adjourned yesterday, I have received a note 
from a friend, which I will read to the House. The writer is 
a scholar, of unsurpassed attainments in classical erudition and 
literature, and of great knowledge of constitutional and legal 
history ; more than twenty years ago, although not yet an old 
man, he bore a conspicuous part in the deliberations of both 
branches of this legislature — he has always been deeply interes- 
ted in the cause of liberty, and his sympathies have been with 
every movement looking towards the abolition of slavery — I 
mean the Hon. John Glen King, of Salem. His note is as 
follows : — 

Salem, Feb. 19. 

Dear Sir: — I have heard many persons doubt whether you will be able to shew that 
the slaveholders as well as the philanthropists understood — i.e. virtually agreed, that 
there should be no further extension of Slavery, at the time the pro-slavery provisions 
contained in the Constitution were consented to. 

I have, for manv years, entertained a belief on the subject, substantially the same, 
with the doctrine of your resolutions, but I am unable to say where I obtained it, and 
therefore cannot refer to any historical evidence. My views arc shortly these, as I 
have frequently stated to my friends, and perhaps I may have expressed them to you. 

About the time of the establishment of the Constitution, and years before, and alter, 
it was the general belief of all persons who took any interest in the subject of slavery 
that if the slave-irade were abolished, slavery would thereupon dwindle, languish, 
and in a few years die out This was the firm belief of Clarkson, Wilberforce, and 
others in England, and of Dr. Franklin, Rush, Rittenhouse, Jay, Roger Sherman, and 
others, (who were then called philanthropists) in America. The slaveholders and all 
interested in slave property, believed it as well. Hence the desperate efforts made by 
their influence in and out of Parliament to prevent the abolititon of the slave trade. 
The trade itself they cared but little about, except for its effect upon " the institution" 
This, then, was the all but universal belief as to the operation of the abolition of the slave 
trade upon the lift of via very. But for one man (as I have read somewhere) the "all but'' 
might have been omitted in the above sentence. This remarkable exception was the 
sagacious and almo«t infallible Edmund Burke. He was applied to as one of the friends 
of the cause of abolition, by Mr. Wilberforce and Mr. Clarkson, to prepare what was 
called "A Negro Code" for Jamaica. And in conversation with them he expressed 
to them the novel belief that the abolition of the slave trade would not effect the de- 
struction of slaverv. " Destrov slavery" said he, " cither by immediate abolition, or 
by some early limitation of its days, and the slave trade will languish and soon die, 



22 

Not such will be the effect upon slavery of the stopping of the slave trade. This lat- 
ter will inevitably follow the law of all mercantile transactions — where there is a 
demand there will he a supply. Slaves will eoine somehow, will he produced by some 
means, in spite of all your laws, while there is such a class as slaveholders to buy 
them." 

Bat Mr. Burke was not believed in this as in many other matters when he was 
wiser than his generation, and the belief remained with all in England, France, and 
this country, as 1 fully believe, that to limit the slave trade to any particular date, 
was to determine the death hour of slavery itself. 

Now, I have always taken it for granted, that, under the influence of this persuasion, 
the compromises of the Constitution were made. Both parties not only believed, hut 
intended, and so virtually agreed with each other, that soon after 1808, slavery itself 
was to cease from the land. These men never dreamed of Texas, Florida, or even 
Louisiana, as thereafter to make a part of the Union ; and many of the Southern 
patriots, as is well known, were sick enough of slavery, limited even, as it then was. 
Theoretical and practical freedom and equality were dearer tint* to the whole coun- 
try, than they are now that we have been spoiled by prosperity in our right and 
wrong enterprises. I fully believe that the great men who represented the Northern 
interest at the time, would never have consented to an unlimited continuance of sla- 
very. There must have been a reasonable termination of it in their view and admitted 
by the other side, and well understood by all, or they never would have become par- 
ties to such a compromise. The view, then, which you take in your resolutions, seems 
to me nearly inevitable. With this plain understanding of the necessary effect of the 
abolition of the slave trade in 1808, both parties contracted. They must be supposed 
to fiave intended what they clearly understood. And so. in all reasonings and infer- 
ences from the contract they then made, the intention of both parties may he consider- 
ed as the essence of it, as what they and their successors are bound to observe and 
keep. 

As I have scarcely ever heard any one express any approach to my views upon this 
subject, until I saw your resolutions, I have thought you would excuse and perhaps 
be pleased with this communication from 

Yours, vcrv truly, &c. 

J. G. KING. 

The interesting statements of my learned correspondent, are 
incontrovertible, and while I felt sine of my ground, from pre- 
vious examination, and am ready to maintain it, I cannot hut 
feel doubly reinforced by confirmation proceeding from such 
high authority. 

That Thomas Jefferson was deeply interested in the non- 
extension, and in the abolition of slavery, all know, and none 
dispute. [Jefferson's writings — vol. 1, p. 268 — Letter to Dr. 
Price.] Whoever reads carefully the debates and deliberations 
of that day, cannot doubt that the same objects were, then, 
dear to the heart of James Madison. The immortal memory 
of these great statesmen, and pure patriots is, itself, a withering 
rebuke of the Virginia politicians, who, in our day, with a 
stupid and suicidal perverseness, hug the saw that is tearing 
their vitals. 



23 

That Mr. Madison was wise in regarding slavery as reducing 
a country to imbecility, and therefore an evil which ought not 
to be extended, but on the contrary, requiring to be checked 
and reduced, what a melancholy proof does the subsequent 
history of Virginia afford ! With a territory of unequalled ex- 
tent, among the Atlantic States, of unrivalled climate, and nat- 
ural advantages, and a glorious lustre reflected along her annals 
by names that can never die, and one of which outshines all 
other names in history, she is sinking lower and lower, dragged 
down by the dead weight of slavery. Under the census of 
1820, the ratio of Congressional representation was 40,000 — 
New York had 34 members; Virginia had 21 members. Un- 
der the present census, the ratio is 70,680 — New York holds 
its own — 34. Virginia has gone down to 15 — one third of 
her political power annihilated in 20 years ! 

In 1790, Massachusetts and Maine were one State. Their 
aggregate area was 42,250 square miles. The area of Virginia 
is 61,352 square miles. In 1790, Virginia had 454,881 white 
inhabitants, Massachusetts and Maine had 475,257. 

In 1840, Virginia had 740,972 white inhabitants, Massachu- 
setts and Maine had 1,242,376 ! ! When the difference in area, 
in soil, in climate, and in geographical position, is considered, 
these figures tell the whole story. 

Without going into more extended detail, or citing, as I 
might, numerous additional passages, to sustain the doctrine of 
my Resolutions, I will bring the statement to a close, by en- 
dorsing the assertion [see Theodore Parker's letter on Slavery] 
that, so strong was the conviction at that time, all over the 
Confederacy, that slavery was an evil, which ought not to be 
extended, but restricted, and if possible, removed, had it not 
been for the influence of South Carolina, the abolition of sla- 
very would have been expressly, although prospectively, pro- 
vided for, in the Constitution of the United States ! South 
Carolina stood then, just where she stands now. I trust, sir, 
that the unanimous adoption of the Resolutions before you, will 
show that Massachusetts, too, stands now where she stood then. 



24 

One of the Delegates from South Carolina, Gen. Pinkney, in 
a debate, in the House of Representatives of that State, on the 
Constitution framed for the United States, gives the following 
account of the views and the course of himself and colleagues 
in the Convention ; from which, I am confident, every discrim- 
inating interpreter will gather confirmation of the propositions 
I have maintained. 

In answer to Mr. Lowndes, he said : 

" We were at a loss for some time for a rule to ascertain the proportionate wealth 
of the States -j at last we thought that the productive labor of the inhabitants was the 
best rule for ascertaining their wealth ; in conformity to this rule, joined to a spirit of 
concession, we determined that representatives should be apportioned among the 
several States, by adding to the whole number of free persons three fifths of the 
slaves. We thus obtained a representation for our property, and I confess I did not 
expect that we should have been told on our return, that we had conceded too much 
to the Eastern States, when they allowed us a representation for a species of property 
which they have not among them." The General then said " he would make a few 
observations on the objections which the gentleman had thrown out on the restrictions 
that might be laid on the African trade after the year 1808. On this point your dele- 
gates had to contend with the religious and political prejudices of the Eastern and 
Middle States, and with the interested and inconsistent opinion of Virginia, who was 
warmly opposed to our importing more slaves. I am of the same opinion now as I 
was two years ago, when I used the expressions the gentleman has quoted, that while 
there remained one acre of swamp-land uncleared of South Carolina, I would raise 
my voice against restricting the importation of negroes. I am as thoroughly convin- 
ced as that gentleman is, that the nature of our climate, and the flat, swampy situa- 
tion of our country, obliges us to cultivate our land with negroes, and that without 
them South Carolina would soon be a desert waste. You have so frequently heard 
my sentiments on this subject that I need not repeat them. It was alleged by some 
of the members who opposed an unlimited importation, that slaves increased the 
weakness of any State who admitted them ; that they were a dangerous species of 
property which an invading enemy could easily turn against ourselves and the neigh- 
boring States, and that as we were allowed a representation for them in the House of 
Representatives, our influence in government would be increased in proportion as we 
were less able to defend ourselves. " Show some period," said the members from 
the Eastern States, " when it may be in our power to put a stop, if we please, to the 
importation of this weakness, and we will endeavour for your convenience, to restrain 
the religious and political prejudices of our people on 'this subject." The Middle 
States and Virginia made us no such proposition ; they were for an immediate and 
total prohibition. We endeavoured to obviate the objections that were made, in the 
best manner we could, and assigned reasons for our insisting upon the importation 
which there is no occasion to repeat, as they must occur to every gentleman in the 
House. A committee of the States was appointed in order to accommodate this mat- 
ter, and after a great deal of difficulty, it was settled on the footing recited in the 
Constitution. 

By this settlement we have secured an unlimited importation of negroes for twenty 
years; nor is it declared that the importation shall be then stopped ; it may be con- 
tinued. We have a security that the General Government can never emancipate 
them, for no such authority is granted, and it is admitted on all hands that the Gen- 
eral Government has no powers but what arc expressly granted by the Constitution, 
and that all rights not expressed were reserved by the several States. We have ob- 
tained a right to recover our slaves in whatever part of America they mav take ref- 
uge, which is a right we had not before. In short, considering all circumstances, W6 



25 

have made the best terms for the security of this species of property it was in our 
1 lower to make. We would have made better if we could, but on the whole I do not 
think them bad " 

Is it not evident, from the foregoing language, that the clause 
of the Constitution, allowing Congress to prohibit the importa- 
tion of slaves after 1808, was regarded by General Pinckney, 
and by those whom he addressed, as designed and adapted to 
put limits to the extension of slavery ? Is it not evident that 
in his mind slavery was not dreamed of as going beyond what 
then remained of " unclaimed swampland" in South Carolina ? 
is it not evident that, so far from contemplating such a policy, 
as the statesmen of South Carolina of the present day persist 
in, of extending the baneful institution over the length and 
breadth of North America, General Pinckney and his contem- 
poraries, even in South Carolina, only attempted to justify it, 
in " the iiat, swampy situation" of the low lands of that State ? 
He cites the same arguments used by Mr. Madison in reference 
to the weakness which slavery brings upon a State, and he 
proves that it was the understanding between the Eastern and 
the Southern States, that the power to prohibit the importation 
of slaves, would put a stop to the spread of that " weakness." 
The whole tone and tenor of his remarks demonstrate that it 
was universally regarded that, in consideration of the right con- 
ceded to them, and never possessed before, of recovering their 
fugitive slaves, the South had on their part, made a great 
concession ; and I challenge any man to say what that con- 
cession was, — what the South gave up, — if not the ability to 
replenish and perpetuate the slave institution, from what 
was then believed to be the necessary and the only source of 
its supply — the importation of Africans. If, then, it was un- 
derstood at the time, by the South, even by South Carolina, 
that, in obtaining from the "religious and political prejudices 
of the Eastern and Middle States," a right they had never 
possessed before, they had acceded to an arrangement the 
declared object and design of which was, not only to put 
limits to. but, ultimately to exhaust and remove, the slave 

4 



26 

instil ut ion, what can be imagined more absurd or outrageous 
than for them to charge us with violating the compromises of 
the Constitution because we are determined that slavery shall 
never be extended any more over this continent ? 

I indulge the hope, Mr. Speaker, that in the judgment of the 
House, 1 have proved the following propositions. 

1st — That the southern States, at the time of the formation 
of the Constitution, relinquished all claim to extend the slave in- 
stitution into what were then the only territorial possessions 
of the Union — a claim which was stronger than any they can 
now put forth, to extend it into New Mexico and California. 

2d — That this relinquishment on their part could not then 
have been regarded in any other light than as an acknowledg- 
ment of, and acquiescence in, the principle and the policy of 
the non-extension of slavery. 

3d — That it was then declared to be the judgment of the 
leading men, and of the politicians generally, of the South, 
that slavery was an evil and a wrong. 

4th — That it was understood by both the North and the 
South, not only that slavery was never to be extended, but 
that by authorizing Congress to forbid the importation, a pow- 
er was provided by which, in the course of time, its supply 
being cut off, it would gradually disappear from the States 
within whose limits it then existed — and 

5th — That the free States consented to allow the three- 
fifths ratio to be transferred from the confederation to the Con- 
stitution, and under the lead of Massachusetts, also consented 
to submit to the reclamation of fugitive slaves, within their bor- 
ders, upon the strength of the assurance that such, as I have 
stated, were the sentiments, and such the engagements of the 
slave States. 

If the Southern States, by endeavoring to spread the area of 
slavery, and to perpetuate its existence, have broken their part 
of the engagement, it is clearly our right and our duty, not on- 
ly to render them as little aid, as possible, in such a fatal and 



27 

abominable policy, but to resist and defeat it with our united 
strength and utmost efforts. 

That the people of Massachusetts, of all parties, and without 
exception, are determined to do what they can to prevent the 
institution from extending its blight over the vast regions of 
New Mexico and California, there cannot be a shadow of 
doubt. They all know that no combination or accumulation 
of woes and miseries can be imagined greater for a country, 
than to have gold beneath, and slavery above, its surface. 

If slavery is permitted to take root, beyond its present limits, 
and to cast its desolating shadow wider and wider over this 
continent, then will the last refuge of liberty and humanity be 
closed; and hope — not for a season, but for ages — so far as 
we can see, forever — may bid the world farewell. 

If, at this juncture, the voice of Massachusetts shall be 
heard, rising in all her venerable authority, through the unani- 
mous utterances of her representatives, in both branches of the 
Legislature, and recalling the Southern States to the solemn 
pledges upon which the Union was formed, it will be respect- 
ed, it may be obeyed. 

Let me then urge and implore all, of every party, in this 
House, to unite in the support of the Resolutions before us. 

To my respected associates, belonging to what is called the 
Democratic party, I would say — prove that you are worthy to 
be called by that name. It is your proud and glorious boast to 
belong to the great party of progress. Every where else, the 
world over, the triumphs of that party are recorded in the 
emancipation of the slave, and in lifting up the oppressed. 
The Democratic party, in these free States, ought to occupy, 
and I rejoice to behold evidences thickening all around, that 
they feel that they ought to occupy the front rank in the pres- 
ent contest for the liberty of this continent. 

The gentlemen who represent what is called the Free Soil 
party on this floor, will, of course, gladly co-operate in clothing 
the voice of Massachusetts with might, as she forbids and de- 



28 

nounces the extension of slavery. The courtesy, considera- 
tion, and truly patriotic liberality, and moderation of spirit they 
have exhibited uniformly, in the present session, as well as the 
profound interest they feel in the great object of their exclusive 
devotion, assure me that they will rejoice to unite, with one 
voice and one heart, in pledging Massachusetts to the freedom 
of America. 

To my own political friends I will speak with boldness, 
Whigs of Massachusetts, in sharing with you, the labors of the 
recent political canvass, I felt from the beginning to the end, 
that the success of our candidate was identical with the rescue 
of our boundless territory from the curse of slavery. I thought 
so then. I think so now. I believe, — a few days perhaps 
will show how justly, — that the man who, in obedience to 
our triumphant call, is now approaching the seat of govern- 
ment, will promptly, if opportunity be offered him, sign his 
honored name to a bill containing the Jefferson proviso. I 
assured the people that I supported him, on this belief, and 
that if he were elected, his friends in Massachusetts would do 
their utmost to bring the power of his Administration to bear 
in favor of the great interests of freedom and philanthropy. 
That pledge, so far as I am concerned, is now redeemed. 

In taking my seat, Mr. Speaker, I would observe that, in 
constructing the last Resolution, I have copied the ancient 
phraseology. As the sentiments are such as Massachusetts 
cherished and maintained in the olden time, it is fitting that 
they should be conveyed in the form of words used in the rev- 
olutionary age, and coming down to us from that primitive pe- 
riod, when the whole body of the freemen assembled in what 
was then called " a Great and General Court." It is true that 
we are not the whole body of the people, but, Sir, if the whole 
people of Massachusetts were assembled here, and the question 
were put to them, they would respond to these Resolutions 
with prompt and earnest unanimity, and with an : - aye," thai 
would reach the Capitol al Washington and reverberate in 
>oiips of thundor through the. land. 



APPENDIX. 



It will be perceived that the Resolves of the Judiciary 
Committee of the House declare that it is the duty of Congress 
to insist upon the establishment of " the principle of the Ordi- 
dance of 1787 upon the subject of slavery," over new Mexico, 
California, and all " territories of the Union," and argue that 
legislation to this effect, by Congress, would not violate, but 
preserve, the compromises between the North and South that 
secured the adoption of the Constitution." The only differ- 
ence between their Resolves, and those offered by Mr. Upham, 
was that the latter stated distinctly and expressly the same 
doctrine which the former conveyed by necessary implication 
and construction. The Judiciary Committee and others par- 
ticularly interested in their Resolves, adhered to them with 
great pertinacity. Several of the leading men of the Free Soil 
and Democratic party either contended for certain favorite Re- 
solves of their own, or were unwilling to entertain any amend- 
ments but such as they might suggest. In the course of the 
discussion it became evident that many influences were in op- 
eration unfavorable to a discriminating and just decision in 
reference to the various sets of Resolutions before the House. 
So unprepared were the House to meet the subject on its his- 
torical merits, that a leading member maintained the assertion 
(hat the slavery question did not attract prominent attention at 
the time when the Constitution was formed ! It was also 
maintained that at the date of the Ordinance of 1787 the Uni- 
ted States owned as much territory south of the Ohio as North 



30 

of it, and that while the latter was consecrated to freedom, the 
former was designed to be desecrated to slavery ! ! ! Some 
gentlemen went so far as to speak of it, as doubtful, whether 
the Constitution was founded upon any compromises whatever ! 
It was quite evident, in consequence of the historical heresies 
that had mingled in the debate, and the constitutional bugbears 
that had been " scared up" from the word " compact,', that 
unanimity could not be obtained unless some one would set an 
example of concession ; and as the doctrine of his Resolves 
was conveyed, although not so explicitly and unequivocally as 
he desired, by the Resolves of the House Judiciary Committee, 
Mr. Upham felt it to be his duty to withdraw his amendment, 
which he did, as follows : 

Mr. Speaker, — I wish, at this stage of the discussion, to 
occupy for a few moments, the attention of the House. In 
amending my resolutions, yesterday, I relieved them of the 
word " compact," which had created such, to me, most sur- 
prising alarm in the breast of the learned gentleman from Bos- 
ton, (Mr. Curtis.) I did this not because I agree at all with 
that gentleman in his objection to the word. Whether in 
other respects the Constitution of the United States is a com- 
pact I do not mean to start an enquiry. But on the subject of 
slavery it rests on a " compact," and that compact is, as it were, 
drawn up into its very substance. I presume that nothing, 
of human arrangement, can be more immovable and unaltera- 
ble than the Ordinance of 1787. It underlies the Constitution, 
and cannot be separated from it — the States were incapable of 
forming a Constitution that should not sanction, uphold and 
perpetuate it. Nothing could get over it, nothing ever can get 
under it. The Ordinance is on its very face, and in its ex- 
press terms, a "compact." Sir, the Constitution of Massachu- 
setts is a "compact," and so declared, in its preamble. It is 
not from any opinion of my own, but to prevent occasion for 
dispute on an extraneous topic, and to disperse the apprehen- 
sions of the gentleman, who saw poison lurking in the word, 
and cried out "latet anguis in herba," that 1 struck it out. 



31 

But, Mr. Speaker, I do not design to mingle any further in 
this debate. By no agency of mine shall the voice of Massa- 
chusetts, pleading in behalf of the oppressed, and forbidding 
the extension of slavery, be deprived of the moral power that 
unanimity may impart to its tones. 

The gentleman from Northampton, (Mr. Hopkins,) fears to 
assert the principle of historical truth on which my resolutions 
rest. The gentleman from Worcester, (Mr. Bacon,) also has 
objections and doubts. The gentleman irom Groton, (Mr. 
Bout well,) controverts the historical statements by which I 
have sustained them. An influential press in this city, which 
is supposed to reflect the sentiments of a leading member of 
this House, (Col. Schouler,) has expressed dissent from some of 
my conclusions. Several gentlemen have manifested a novel r 
unprecedented, and strange distrust in historical evidence gen- 
erally. Many others find that more time is needed, than can 
now be afforded, to enable what they call the new truths I 
have presented, to be adjusted into their proper position in 
their minds. 

I should have been pleased, not of course on my own ac- 
count, for in spreading my views before the House and the 
people, I have done all that concerns me personally, but on 
account of what I believe to be the vital interest of the cause, 
had gentlemen all felt with me that it was for Massachusetts- 
no w to hold the South to her proved engagements. When 
she takes the ground upon which I have faithfully endeavored 
to place her, and says to the South and to the World, I only 
consented to give to slavery the temporary countenance, afford- 
ed by the Constitution, because I was assured that it could not 
be extended, but would be permitted to die out and disappear 
from the land — when Massachusetts takes this ground, her an- 
cient honor will be redeemed, and her incumbent duty discharg- 
ed. There are wise and good men in the South, who woidd be 
glad to avail themselves of the doctrine of my Resolutions, 
should they be expressed by the high authority of this Com- 
monwealth. If they could take the ground that the plighted 



32 

faith of the South engaged her to withhold her hand from 
spreading slavery, they might appeal with success to the pride 
and self-respect and sense of honor of her people, and the tri- 
umph of our cause would thus be secured. 1 believe that the 
party in the South, whose sympathies are allied to those of the 
majority on this floor, would be able to pass through the im- 
pending crisis, and bear themselves up in sustaining the in- 
coming national Administration, in the establishment of territo- 
rial governments on the principles of freedom, (the only ones, I 
trust, that can ever be established,) much more effectually and 
auspiciously, were we to put the question on the ground I have 
indicated, rather than on any other. But I feel that my whole 
duty to our friends in the South, to my own party, to all other 
parties, and to our venerable Commonwealth, has been dis- 
charged, and rather than have any considerable portion of her 
representatives record their votes against an historical proposi- 
tion essential to her honor and glory, in the past and in the fu- 
ture, I will now do what I can by withdrawing my Resolu- 
tions, to bring to a close a discussion which consumes the pub- 
lic time, and is bringing us into false positions." 

The result was that the other Resolves were rejected with- 
out a count, and the House adopted the Resolves of its Judi- 
ciary Committee, the vote being by yeas and nays, and one 
solitary voice only being raised in the negative. 

In an eloquent speech, in the course of the debate, Mr. Banks 
of Waltham maintained with great ability that the Ordinance 
was a "compact," and, as such, was renewed and perpetuated 
by the first paragraph of the sixth article of the Constitution of 
the United States, which declares that "all engagements en- 
tered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as 
valid against the United States, under this Constitution, as un- 
der the Confederation." It is a singular coincidence, that while 
IVtr. Banks was speaking in the House of Representatives in 
IJoston, a very interesting debate was taking place in the Sen- 
ate of the United States, in which Messrs. Webster and Cal- 



33 

hoim were the chief speakers. Throughout the debate, and by 
Mr. Webster especially and over and over again, it was admit- 
ted and affirmed that the Constitution was the result of com- 
promises, touching the matter of slavery ; and it was also as- 
sumed, as a matter beyond question, that, in some respects, the 
Constitution was a compact. 



ORDINANCE OF 1787. 



[This copy of the Ordinance shows the amendments made 
in Congress on the 12th of July to Mr. Carrington's report of 
the 11th. All that was struck out is printed in [italic,] what 
was inserted is in small capitals.] 



An Ordinance for the Government of the Territory of the 
United States. Northwest of the River Ohio. 

Be it ordained by the United States in Congress assembled, 
That the said territory, for the purposes of temporary govern- 
ment, be one district ; subject, however, to be divided into two 
districts, as future circumstances may, in the opinion of Con- 
gress, make it expedient. 

Be it ordained by the authority aforesaid, That the estates 
both of resident and non-resident proprietors in the said territo- 
ry, dying intestate, shall descend to and be distributed among 
their children and the descendants of a deceased child in equal 
parts, the descendants of a deceased child or grand-child to take 
the share of their deceased parent in equal parts among them ; 
and where there shall be no children or descendants, then in 
5 



34 

equal parts to the next of kin, in equal degree ; and among 
collaterals, the children of a deceased brother or sister of the 
intestate shall have in equal parts among them their deceased 
parent's share ; and there shall in no case be a distinction 

BETWEEN KINDRED OF THE WHOLE AND HALF BLOOD J Saving ill 

all cases to the widow of the intestate her third part of the real 
estate for life, and [where there shall be no children of (he i?ites- 
tafe] one-third part of the personal estate ; and this law rela- 
tive to descents and dower shall remain in full force until altered 
by the Legislature of the district. And until the Governor and 
Judges shall adopt laws as hereinafter mentioned, estates in the 
said territory may be devised or bequeathed by wills in writing, 
signed and sealed by him or her in whom the estate may be, 
(being of full age,) and attested by three witnesses ; and real 
estates may be conveyed by lease and re-lease, or bargain and 
sale, signed, sealed, and delivered by the person, being of full 
age, in whom the estate may be, and attested by two witnes- 
ses, provided such wills be duly proved, and such conveyances 
be acknowledged, or the execution thereof duly proved, and be 
recorded within one year after proper magistrates, courts, and 
registers shall be appointed for that purpose ; and personal prop- 
erty may be transferred by delivery, saving, however, to the 
[inhabitants of Kaskaskies and Post Vincent] French and 
Canadian inhabitants, and other settlers of the Kaskas- 
kies, Saint Vincent's, and the neighboring villages, who 
have heretofore professed themselves citizens of virgin- 
IA, their laws and customs now in force among them relative 
to the descent and conveyance of property. 

Re it ordained by the authority aforesaid, That there shall 
be appointed from time to time, by Congress, a Governor, 
whose commission shall continue in force for the term of three 
years, unless sooner revoked by Congress ; he shall reside in 
the district, and have a freehold estate therein, in one thousand 
acres of land, while in the exercise of his office. 

There shall be appointed from time to time, by Congress, a 
Secretary, whose commission shall continue in force for four 
years, unless sooner revoked ; he shall reside in the district, 
and have a freehold estate therein, in five hundred acres 
of land, while in the exercise of his office. It shall be his du- 
ty to keep and preserve the acts and laws passed by the Legis- 
lature, and the public records of the district, and the proceed- 
ings of the Governor in his executive department, and transmit 
authentic copies of such acts and proceedings every six months 



35 

to the Secretary of Congress. There shall also be appointed a 
Court to consist of three judges, any two of whom to form a 
Court, who shall have a common law jurisdiction, and reside in 
the district, and have each therein a freehold estate in five hun- 
dred acres of land, while in the exercise of their offices ; and 
their commissions shall continue in force during good behavior. 

The Governor and Judges, or a majority of them, shall adopt 
and publish in the district such laws of the original States, 
criminal and civil, as may be necessary and best suited to the 
circumstances of the district, and report them to Congress from 
time to time, which laws shall be in force in the District until 
the organization of the General Assembly therein, unless disap- 
proved of by Congress ; but afterwards the Legislature shall 
have authority to alter them as they shall think fit. 

The Governor for the time being shall be commander-in- 
chief of the militia, appoint and commission all officers in the 
same below the rank of general officers ; all general officers 
[above that rank] shall be appointed and commissioned by Con- 
gress. 

Previous to the organization of the General Assembly, the 
Governor shall appoint such magistrates and other civil officers, 
in each county or township, as he shall find necessary for the 
preservation of the peace and good order in the same. After 
the General Assembly shall be organized, the powers and du- 
ties of magistrates and other civil officers shall be regulated and 
defined by the said Assembly ; but all magistrates and other 
civil officers, not herein otherwise directed, shall, during the 
continuance ol this temporary government, be appointed by the 
Governor. 

For the prevention of crimes and injuries, the laws to be 
adopted or made shall have force in all parts of the district, 
and for the execution of process, criminal and civil, the Govern- 
or shall make proper divisions thereof; and he shall proceed 
from time to time, as circumstances may require, to lay out the 
parts of the district in which the Indian titles shall have been 
extinguished into counties and. townships, subject, however, 
to 'such alterations as may thereafter be made by the Legisla- 
ture. 

So soon as there shall be five thousand free male inhabitants, 
of full age, in the district, upon giving proof thereof to the 
Governor, they shall receive authority, with time and place, to 
elect Representatives from their counties or townships, to rep- 
resent them in the General Assembly; provided that, for ev- 



30 

ery five hundred free male inhabitants, there shall be one repre- 
sentative, and so on progressively with the number of free 
male inhabitants shall the right of representation increase, until 
the number of representatives shall amount to twenty-five, af- 
ter which the number and proportion of representatives shall 
be regulated by the Legislature ; provided that no person be 
eligible or qualified to act as a representative unless he shall 
have been a citizen of one of the United States three years and 
be a resident in the district, or unless he shall have resided in 
the district three years, and in either case shall likewise hold 
in his own right, in fee simple, two hundred acres of land with- 
in the same : Provided also, that a freehold in fifty acres of 
land in the district, having been a citizen of one of the States, 
and being resident in the district, or the like freehold and two 
years' residence in the district, shall be necessary to qualify a 
man as an elector of a representative. 

The Representatives thus elected shall serve for the term of 
two years, and, in case of the death of the Representative, 
or removal from office, the Governor shall issue a writ to 
the county or township for which he was a member, to elect 
another in his stead, to serve for the residue of the term. 

The General Assembly, or Legislature, shall consist of the 
Governor, Legislative Council, and a House of Representatives. 
The Legislative Council shall consist of five members, to con- 
tinue in office five years, unless sooner removed by Congress, 
any three of whom to be a quorum, and the members of the 
Council shall be nominated and appointed in the following 
manner, to wit : As soon as Representatives shall be elected, 
the Governor shall appoint a time and place for them to meet 
together, and, when met, they shall nominate ten persons, res- 
idents in the district, and each possessed of a freehold in five 
hundred acres of land, and return their names to Congress ; 
five of whom Congress shall appoint and commission to serve 
as aforesaid; and whenever a vacancy shall happen in the 
Council, by death or removal from office, the House of Repre- 
sentatives shall nominate two persons, qualified as aforesaid, 
for each vacancy, and return their names to Congress ; one 'of 
whom Congress shall appoint and commission for the residue of 
the term ; and every five years, four months at least before the 
expiration of the time of service of the members of Council, 
the said House shall nominate ten persons, qualified as afore- 
said, and return their names to Congress, five of whom Con- 
gress shall appoint and commission to serve as members of the 



Council five years, unless sooner removed. And the Governor, 
Legislative Council, and House of Representatives, shall have 
authority to make laws in all eases for the good government of 
the district, not repugnant to tiic principles and articles in this 
ordinance established and declared. And all bills having pass- 
ed by a majority in the House, and by a majority in the Coun- 
cil, shall be referred to the Governor for his assent ; but no bill 
or legislative act whatever shall be of any force without his as- 
sent. The Governor shall have power to convene, prorogue, 
and dissolve the General Assembly, when in his opinion it shall 
be expedient. 

The Governor, Judges, Legislative Council, Secretary, and 
such other oiflcers as Congress shall appoint in the district, 
shall take an oath or affirmation of fidelity and of office, the 
Governor before the President of Congress, and all other offi- 
cers before the Governor. As soon as a Legislature shall be 
formed in the district, the Council and House, assembled in 
one room, shall have authority by joint ballot to elect a dele- 
gate to Congress, who shall have a seat in Congress, with a 
right of debating, but not of voting, during this temporary gov- 
ernment. 

And for extending [to all parties of the Confederacy] the 
fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty which form 
the basis whereon these Republics, their laws and constitutions 
are erected ; to fix and establish those principles as the basis 
of all laws, constitutions, and governments, which forever 
hereafter shall be formed in the said territory ; to provide also 
for the establishment of States, and permanent government 
therein, and for their admission to a share in the Federal 
Councils on an equal footing with the original States, at as ear- 
ly periods as may be consistent with the general interest : 

// is hereby ordained and declared by the authority aforesaid, 
That the following articles shall be considered as articles of 
compact between the original States and the People and States 
in the said territory, and forever remain unalterable, unless by 
common consent, to wit : 

Article the First. No person, demeaning himself in a peace- 
able and orderly manner, shall ever be molested on account of 
his mode of worship or religious sentiments in the said ter- 
ritory. 

Article the Second. The inhabitants of the said territory 
shall always be entitled to the benefits of the writ of habeas 
corpus and of the trial by jury : of a proportionate representa- 



2S 

tioii of the people in the Legislature, and of judicial proceedings 
according to the course of the common law ; all persons shall 
be bailable unless for capital offences, where the proof shall be 
evident or the presumption great ; all fines shall be moderate, 
and no cruel or unusual punishment shall be inflicted ; no man 
shall be deprived of his liberty or property but by the judg- 
ment of his peers, or the law of the land ; and should the 
public exigencies make it necessary for the common preserva- 
tion to take any person's property, or to demand his particular 
services, full compensation shall be made for the same ; and, in 
the just preservation of rights and property, it is understood 
and declared that no law ought ever to be made or have 
force in the said territory that shall in any manner whatever 
interfere with or affect private contracts or engagements, bona 
fide and without fraud previously formed. 

Article the Third. [Institutions for the promotion of ] relig- 
ion [and] morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good 

GOVERNMENT AND THE HAPPINESS OF MANKIND, Schools and the 

means of education shall forever be encouraged, [and all per- 
sons while young shall be taught some useful occupation.] The 
utmost good faith shall always be observed towards the In- 
dians; their lands and property shall never be taken from them 
without their consent ; and in their property, rights and liberty 
they never shall be invaded or disturbed, unless in just and 
lawful wars, authorised by Congress ; but laws founded in 
justice and humanity shall from time to time be made, for pre- 
venting wrongs being done to them, and for preserving peace 
and friendship with them. 

Article the Fourth. The said territory and the States 
which may be formed therein, shall forever remain a part of 
this Confederacy of the United States of America, subject to 
the articles of Confederation, and to such alterations therein as 
shall be constitutionally made ; and to all the acts and ordi- 
nances of the United States in Congress assembled, conforma- 
ble thereto. The inhabitants and settlers in the said territory 
shall be subject to pay a part of the Federal debts, contracted or 
to be contracted, and a proportional part of the expenses of 
Government, to be apportioned on them by Congress, accord- 
ing to the same common rule and measure by which apportion- 
ments thereof shall be made on the other States ; and the tax- 
es for paying their proportion shall be laid and levied by the 
authority and direction of the Legislature of the district or dis- 
tricts, or new States, as in the original States within the time 



39 

agreed upon by the United States in Congress assembled. 
The Legislatures of those districts, or new States, shall never 
interfere with the primary disposal of the soil by the United 
States in Congress assembled, nor with any regulations Con- 
gress may find necessary for securing the title in such soil to 
the bona fide purchasers. No tax shall be imposed on lands the 
property of the United States ; and in no case shall non-resident 
proprietors be taxed higher than residents. The navigable wa- 
ters leading into the Mississippi and St. Lawrence and the car- 
rying places between the same shall be common highways, and 
forever free, as well to the inhabitants of the said territory as to 
the citizens of the United States, and those of any other States 
that may be admitted into the Confederacy, without any tax, 
impost, or duty therefor. 

Article the Fifth. There shall be formed in the said territo- 
ry not less than three nor more than five States; and the 
boundaries of the States, as soon as Virginia shall alter her act 
of cession and [authorize] consent to the same, shall become 
fixed and established as follows, to wit: The western State 
in the said territory shall be bounded by the Mississippi, the 
Ohio, and Wabash rivers ; a direct line drawn from the Wa- 
bash and Post Vincent's due north to the territorial line be- 
tween the United States and Canada, and by the said territori- 
al line to the Lake of the Woods and Mississippi. The mid- 
dle State shall be bounded by the said direct line, the Wabash 
from Post Vincent's to the Ohio ; by the Ohio, by a direct line 
drawn due north from the mouth of the great Miami to the 
said territorial line, and by the said territorial line. The east- 
ern State shall be bounded by the last mentioned direct line, 
the Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the said territorial line : Provid- 
ed, however, and it is further understood and declared, that the 
boundaries of these three States shall be subject so far to be al- 
tered, that if Congress shall hereafter find it expedient, they 
shall have authority to form one or two States in that part of 
the said territory which lies north of an east and west line 
drawn through the southerly bend or extreme of Lake Michi- 
gan : and whenever any of the said States shall have sixty 
thousand free inhabitants therein, such state shall be admitted 
by its delegates into the Congress of the United States, on an 
equal footing with the original States in all respects whatever ; 
and shall be at liberty to form a permanent constitution and 
State government : Provided the constitution and govern- 
ment so to be formed shall be republican, and in conformity to 



40 

the principles contained in these articles ; and, so far as it can 
be consistent with the general interest of the Confederacy, such 
admission shall he allowed at an earlier period, and when there 
may be a less number of inhabitants in the State than sixty 
thousand. 

Article the Sixth. There shall be neither slavery nor 

INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE IN THE SAID TERRITORY, OTHERWISE THAN 
IN PUNISHMENT OF CRIMES WHEREOF THE PARTY SHALL HAVE BEEN 
DULY CONVICTED : PROVIDED ALWAYS, THAT ANY PERSON ESCAP- 
ING INTO THE SAME, FROM WHOM LABOR OR SERVICE IS LAWFULLY 
CLAIMED IN ANY ONE OF THE ORIGINAL STATES, SUCH FUGITIVE 
MAY BE LAWFULLY RECLAIMED AND CONVEYED TO THE PERSON 
CLAIMING HIS OR HER LABOR OR SERVICE AS AFORESAID. 

Be it ordained hy the authority aforesaid. That the resolu- 
tions of the 23d of April, 1784, relative to the subject of 
this ordinance, be and the same arc hereby repealed and de- 
clared null and void. 

Done by the United States in Congress assembled, the 13th 
day of July, in the year of our Lord 1787, and of their 
sovereignty and independence the 12th. 

CHARLES THOMSON, Sec'y- 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




